DR. VANDANA U. PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, BARODA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3362/AHD/2016Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 July 2019AY 2008-094 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the quantum additions were remitted, the penalty proceedings should also be remitted to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination. This was to be done in light of the findings in the related quantum proceedings.

What were the facts?

The appeals and cross objections concerned penalties under section 271(1)(c) related to additions made for undisclosed investments and disbursements from a private discretionary trust. The quantum additions themselves had been remitted to the Assessing Officer.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether penalty proceedings could be sustained when the underlying quantum additions were being re-examined. The Tribunal considered the interconnectedness of quantum and penalty proceedings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Heard together (5 matters)

CO No. 16/Ahd/17
CO No 18/Ahd/ 17
ITA No. 2989/Ahd/2016
CO No. 20/Ahd/ 17
ITA No. 2988/Ahd/2016

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

1.

All the five appeals and all the three cross objections deal with a common issue with respect to penalties under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in respect of quantum additions relating to the investments in, and disbursements from, a undisclosed private discretionary trust by the name of Athena Trust settled by Dr A T Patel in favour of the family members.

2.

Vide our order of even date, we have remitted the matter regarding taxability of the related quantum additions to the file of the Assessing Officer. We, therefore, deem it fit and proper to remit these penalty proceedings to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh examination in the light of the findings in the related quantum proceedings de novo. Ordered accordingly.

ITA No. 2988,89 and 90/Ahd/2016 and the related COs Assessment year: 2013-14 and 3363/Ahd/16 Assessment year: 2008-09 and 2012-13 Page 4 of 4

3.

In the result, all the five appeals and all the three cross objections are allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above. Pronounced in the open court today on the 31st day of July, 2019.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →